OK, I can't by inspection or by test see any performance differences between the 2 implementations (in fact, the older one, in some benchmarks, was slower due to the string operations in the critical path)...
Any ideas? On Nov 26, 2013, at 4:23 PM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > Thx... the key is httpd-2.4.6-uds-delta.patch and > that shows nothing, that I can see, which would > result in the "old" being faster than the "new"... > especially in the critical section where we do > the apr_sockaddr_info_get() stuff... > > On Nov 26, 2013, at 3:07 PM, Daniel Ruggeri <drugg...@primary.net> wrote: > >> I reapplied the patches in order to 2.4.6 before r1531340 was added to >> the proposal. Attached are the three diff's of use: >> httpd-2.4.6-uds-original.patch - Everything in the backport proposal up >> to (but not including) r1531340 sans the stuff that doesn't fit >> httpd-2.4.6-uds-new.patch - The 2.4 patch proposed with r1511313 applied >> first. Note that this doesn't include r1543174 >> httpd-2.4.6-uds-delta.patch - The delta between the two modified trees >> >> -- >> Daniel Ruggeri >> >> On 11/22/2013 5:27 PM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote: >>> Sorry, I thought the diffs I sent off list were good enough. I'll have >>> to see if I even still have the original build lying around. >>> Effectively, I just took the list of patches in the backport proposal >>> and applied them one at a time to the 2.4.6 sources. If I can't find the >>> build, I'll do the same over and send that instead. >>> >>> -- >>> Daniel Ruggeri >> >> <httpd-2.4.6-uds-delta.patch><httpd-2.4.6-uds-new.patch><httpd-2.4.6-uds-original.patch> >
